Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010159462026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1753/2026 SARIF UDDIN CHOUDHURY AND ANR S/O LT. AFTAB UDDIN CHOUDHURY 2: ROSUMA BEGOM CHOUDHURY W/O SARIF UDDIN CHOUDHURY BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF RANGAUTI PT.I HAILAKANDI P.O. P.S.AND DIST. - HAILAKANDI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S B CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 31.07.2026 1. Heard Ms. S. B. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioners as well as Ms. S. H. Bora, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioners, namely, Sarif Uddin Choudhury and Rosuma Begom Choudhury, have prayed for granting pre-arrest bail apprehending arrest in connection with Hailakandi P.S. Case No. 119/2026, registered under Section 61(2)/318(4)/336(3)/340(2) of BNS, 2023 (GR Case No. 408/2026). 3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioners are apprehending arrest was lodged on 18/7/2026 by the informant stating inter alia that petitioners along with their son had approached them on different occasions and had convinced them that they can secure appointments for them in the department of Water Resource Department, Government of Assam. Believing their assurances, they paid an amount of rupees twenty one lakhs fifty five thousand by online payments as well as by giving cash money. It is further stated that the petitioners and their son had received the money and thereafter, appointment letters were issued in the name of the informants. But when they inquired about the same, the said appointment letters were found to be fake. On finding the same, the informants asked for the money from the petitioners but the petitioners initially said that they will return the money but later on they refused to receive the calls or any contact or any attempted contacts made by the informants. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the son of the petitioners was arrested and he is behind the bars and that the petitioners in the instant case are the mother father of Masum Ahmed Chaudhary, who were not involved in the said offence. 5. Ms. S. H. Bora, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state, however, submits that there is clear allegation in the FIR that all the three had induced the informants to part with the money for getting employment in the said Page No.# 3/3 Department. 6. On consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels, more so in view of the fact that the petitioners had admitted their liability, this Court deems it fit that the petitioners be released on pre-arrest bail on furnishing of a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with one local surety of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the arresting authority under the following conditions that the petitioners: (i) will appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today. (ii) will not influence the witnesses connected with the incident case. (iii) will not hamper or tamper with the evidence of the case. If the petitioner is found violating any of the conditions, his bail order will be amenable for cancellation. 7. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant